• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: CarePlus 24

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

15A Mountfield Road, Hampden Park, Eastbourne, East Sussex, BN22 9BJ (01323) 500204

Provided and run by:
Joyce Darfoor Ltd

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 2 July 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection of CarePlus 24 took place on 23 May 2016 and was announced. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming. We did this because they were also the manager and were sometimes out of the office supporting staff or visiting people who use the service. We needed to be sure that they would be in. One inspector undertook the inspection.

Before the inspection visit we reviewed the information we held about the service, including the Provider Information Return (PIR) which the provider completed before the inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed information we received since the last inspection.

During our inspection we went to the office and spoke to the registered manager. We reviewed the care records of three people that used the service. We looked at three staff recruitment files, supervision and training records, and spoke with the registered manager about the systems in place for monitoring the quality of care people received. We looked at a variety of the service’s policies such as those relating to safeguarding, medicines, complaints and quality assurance.

After the inspection we made phone calls to care workers, people that used the service and relatives of people that used the service to get their feedback about what it was like to receive care from the staff.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 2 July 2016

We carried out an inspection of CarePlus 24 Agency Domiciliary Care Agency (DCA) on 24, 29 and 30 April 2015, we found the provider had not met the regulations in relation to the safe management of medicines, and had not ensured staff were of good character and suitable to work with people who used the service. People’s personal records were not accurate and up to date. The provider did not have an effective system to regularly assess, monitor and improve the quality of service that people received. An action plan was submitted by the provider that detailed how they would meet the legal requirements by August 2015.

We undertook this inspection on 23 May 2016 to check the provider had made improvements and to confirm that legal requirements had been met. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was now meeting the regulations. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming. We did this because they were also the registered manager and were sometimes out of the office supporting staff or visiting people who use the service. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

CarePlus 24 provides personal care services to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection three people received care from a member of staff who lived-in at their home. CarePlus 24 provides support for people who require a range of personal and care support related to personal hygiene, mobility, nutrition and continence. Some people were living with early stages of a dementia type illness or other long-term health related condition. People lived reasonably independent lives but required support to maintain this independence.

In addition to the DCA the provider also provided care staff to work in local care and nursing homes on a temporary basis. These staff are often referred to as ‘agency staff.’ This type of agency is not regulated by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) therefore was not included in our inspection although it is referred to in this report.

People were supported by staff who knew them well. Staff had a good understanding of people’s individual needs and choices. People told us they received the care they needed and wanted. They said they were involved in making their own decisions on a day to day basis.

Some people required support to take their medicines and this was done safely by staff who had received the appropriate training. Risks were well managed and people were supported to stay as safe as possible whilst maintaining their independence and lifestyle choices.

There were enough staff who had been safely recruited to look after people. Staff were introduced to people and were known to them before they supported them alone. Staff received on-going training and supervision to help them meet the needs of people who used the service. Staff told us they felt supported by the manager who was open and approachable.

People were regularly asked for their feedback through care reviews and telephone contact by the registered manager. There was a quality assurance system in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service.